06 May 2015

The Rising Tide of Civil Asset Forfeiture

George Rebane

[This is the transcript of my regular KVMR commentary broadcast on 6 May 2015.]

“Civil asset forfeiture is a decades-old tool that gives law enforcement the power to seize property if it’s suspected of being related to a crime. … California has safeguards in place to protect innocent people from the harmful practices of civil asset forfeiture. However, a new report from the Drug Policy Alliance (download here) found that such measures haven’t stopped law enforcement agencies from using federal forfeiture laws to circumvent state policies.” So advises a recent report in The Daily Signal. The specifics of how the state’s corrupt law enforcement agencies take advantage of this end-run to enrich their own coffers should enrage all of us. Unfortunately, even though this is a nationwide problem with many calls for reform, for some reason our media chooses not to report such summary takings from innocent citizens.

In recent months the thin veil of civilization has suffered several rips in various cities across the land. The uneven public focus has been applied to something labeled racist bias in police departments or police brutality against minorities. And this has caused our Dept of Justice to paint most local law enforcement agencies with the broad brush of racism in the minds of most black people. Such an indictment has not always been backed by evidence (as in Ferguson), or the officers, accused of misconduct and worse, have been submitted to a peremptory trial by mob in the media even before the formal judicial process is launched.

Now I am not implying that the police in NYC and Baltimore were innocent of the deaths they caused. But I am saying that the relationship between urban constabularies and law abiding citizens still needs a lot of healing since the race riots of the 1960s, in spite of the great gains made by minorities over the intervening decades.

Today we are being told of an established conflict of interest between these same law enforcement agencies and the citizens of all races, means, and backgrounds. Whenever a police action can result in a direct financial benefit to the police department, you can be sure that such actions will be misused and abused. This is exactly what has happened with civil asset forfeitures in which the police effectively wind up being the judge, jury, and executioner in seizing private property using applicable federal laws to circumvent more restrictive state laws.

In California alone, civil asset forfeitures have increased from $36M in 2002 to over $100M in 2013. And we have to realize that such forfeitures occur outside of established due processes in which there is a presumption of innocence before the property is seized. In such seizures all that is required is for the police to have an internal determination that the property in question is “suspected” of being related to criminal activity in some way.

Placing such peremptory takings under federal law gives local police additional cover, since then they are participating with federal agents under the Department of Justice, and subsequently split the take as prescribed by that department’s so-called Equitable Sharing Program. In states with relatively lax civil forfeiture laws, the state and police departments split the loot 50-50. However, in states like California with strict forfeiture laws, the police working under federal law get to keep 80% of the take.

All of these roughshod policing policies serve to erode public confidence in local law enforcement. Arguing that they are necessary to reduce crime rates doesn’t hold water. What such policies do is shift perceived criminality and injustice from hoodlums to those charged with maintaining security under our system of law and order. When our police practice thuggery without recourse, we will come to live under a totalitarian system like the former USSR which also trumpeted its low crime rates. In closing, I want to remind listeners that just because it isn’t in the news does not mean it is not happening – do your own research and then contact your elected representatives.

Speaking of doing your own research, if you want to find out more about the ongoing State of Jefferson movement and voice your opinion, then attend next Tuesday’s meeting of the Nevada County Board of Supervisors at the Rood Center after lunch.

My name is Rebane, and I also expand on this and related themes on georgerebane.com where the transcript of this commentary is posted with relevant links, and where such issues are debated extensively. However my views are not necessarily shared by KVMR. Thank you for listening.

Comments

George,

The Kelly File on Fox News had a long segment on the civil asset forfeiture law and the impact on small business last night. They used as an example a mom and pop store that sold fish sandwiches, gas and cigarettes. The owner was making deposits under $10,000, as he said to avoid the hassle of filling out the federal paper work for deposits over $10,000. Megan Kelly promised the owner that she would stay on the story until his money was returned. The feds took his account of $107,000 dollars, of which their were $60,000 in checks written to suppliers that bounced. It put him out of business, until family and friends help raise some operating cash.

I assume Russ is talking about the IRS seizing peoples money.
They don't even bother to do any investigation of any wrongdoing. They simply hose bank accounts. Then the victim has to spend thousands on lawyers to try to get some of the money back. The IRS can keep the money even though the person is never charged, let alone convicted of any crime. The fed govt is completely out of control. And the left loves to paint any politician that speaks of ending this practice as a wild eyed right-wing nut.

I wonder what our county's forfeiture statistics look like? RMJ/MMJ business related properties would be low hanging fruit and I could see the forfeiture overreach line being easily crossed. In these cases, growers might be reluctant to raise a stink, for fear of reprisals. There is a danger that forfeited materials might not even make it to the county or state levels. If you are going to wear an official badge, you need to hold yourself to high moral and ethical standards.

BradC 808am - "If you are going to wear an official badge, you need to hold yourself to high moral and ethical standards." Since official badge wearers have done so well for so long without such encumbrances, pray, from where does this "need" arise?

I remember when it started many years ago, and the controversy. Search and seisure of private property was considered unconstitutional. The foot in the door was over illegal drugs mostly...any excuse. I remember a local man accused of something and his pickup seized and sold before his court appearance where he was declared innocent. He lost his means to drive to work and earn a living. There were others too. I believe this practice corrupts law enforcement. There was a great video showing what's been going on with this illegal practice. If you have any valuables in your car and get pulled over. Some policemen take it claiming you did something illegal to justify the taking. It will cost you to prove your innocence to get your property back...if ever. That's why the oath to protect, and why those who broke it were subject to greater punishment than ordinary law breakers.

Seems what I said in the past fell on deaf ears. Eric Holder and his boys used asset forfeiture vary Liberally after "O" too office right here in Ca. going after dope growers, even after "O" " promised" ,," If he were elected" not to go after states with MMJ laws on the books. Hummm.. How did that work out? Ca. was his first target. Hell.. When a grower was cut from the heard, and the cuffs thrown on, said property ( ANYTHING that could even possibly be tied to being paid for with ill gotten gains) was seized and/or sold, and since the FEDS got what they wanted rarely even charged the guy. ( that would cost money and time) and dragged out the "investigation" until it got lost in the weeds.

New Mexico has just passed a law ending the practice. And a LIB state no less.

As I recall, back in the 90's, the only time forfeiture was done, was after a conviction.
That's when meth was the big money maker.

With "O" in charge, there is little chance of changing what the FEDS do. Just don't tell Hillary. She will use that as the next vote buying scam. " I will do everything in my power, within the law* to end asset forfeiture". ( Now some Lefty will shoot her off an Email)

OMG! Stop the press, we agree on something. I had to check to see if I had wandered onto the wrong blog.

Asset forfeiture is one of the terrible side effects of the War on Drugs that has trickled down to "ordinary" citizens. It is revolting that the government can take away everything you own WITHOUT EVEN CHARGING YOU WITH A CRIME.

The sad truth is that local governments get 80% of all the money the Feds get from asset forfeitures as a bribe to turn against the citizens they are sworn to protect. Ask a constitutional Sheriff what he thinks about this practice. It would be interesting to find out how much money Nevada County has received from these ill gotten gains.

Todd - this is the same branch of govt that found that a farmer growing wheat for his own family's consumption could be fined under the interstate commerce clause.
All sorts of explicit Constitutional rights are tossed aside by the very institution that should be upholding them.
How is it OK these days to be driving along and find yourself detained by law enforcement with no probable cause?
How can it be legal to force a person to sell their home to a developer of a private for-profit shopping center?
The bottom line: why is it legal for the fed govt to take money from us for any other reason than the ones spelled out in law. Once that line is crossed, you have lost your rights to own anything. You have what you have only at the whim of the current powers that be.

George, I was only joking about finding something we agree on. I agree with many "conservative" ideas like a flat tax, the death penalty (in some circumstances), and gun owner's rights.

I'm also concerned about the erosion of our rights at the hand of law enforcement (from the DoJ on down). There has been a move to reinterupt laws to suit their agenda. Asset forfeiture laws were created to take down Drug Kingpins - not to punish everyday citizens.

Now LE is circumventing the warrant requirement by refusing to show the document when asked. Sometimes, they haven't produced a warrant months after barging into someone's home.

ASA-NC's next public event is a Know Your Rights workshop that will be held on Tuesday, May 19, 6:00pm at the Golden Empire Grange. Some people complain about things, others try to do something proactive.

There was some interest in how much is seized locally. It is published in the legal section of the Union several times a year. You can access it by the searching the classified section. From 11-14 to 3-15 law enforcement in Nevada County seized about $375,000. No small chuck of change

Most of the money forfeited in Nevada County last year was related to the murder of one drug dealer by another in a big green house. It involved multiple pot farms on different properties and there was a car at the scene with hundreds and hundreds of thousands in cash in it. I find it interesting that while the DOJ is claiming to reverse the trend because of abuses it looks like the IRS is ramping up their version of it. Not a surprise that polly patty parrot would inflate the figures to inflame.

What about organizations like the WTO, how do they fit into the scheme? They come in from the outside and impose regulations and law suits. For example, I think is was Alberta, Canada that passed a law that would give "green" manufacturers tax breaks or other subsidies if they hire 60% local labor. The WTO filed suit on behalf of Chinese solar panel company for unfair trade because the law gave local companies an unfair trade advantage via subsidized labor. Or the Canadian company that is suing CA for limiting PCB use, a known carcinogen, claiming they lost profits.

How can LE seize your guns without due process?? Silly me, I thought guns were property and no property can be taken without due process. Not even a search warrant needed to snatch property without due process.

On a lighter note, have an old high school buddy who once had a business storing seized assets. He was the guy who even stored the Ted Kazinsky cabin we saw saw on TV on the flatbed trailer being hauled out from Montana. Never lifted a finger, just stored seized assets as LE turn over to him good stuff like yachts, exotic cars, planes, etc. Good money and all he did was farm out the storage facilities to other people who had places and security. There was a multi-million dollar yacht he had "stored" for quite a spell as the owner went thru the slow moving wheels of justice. Finally after the owner was convicted, the Feds auctioned it off for a loss. Only Uncle Sam can take a muti-million yacht or a bunch of Ferraris and lose money after paying folks like my buddy, lol. Sad but true. Fact is sometimes stranger than fiction. Last I heard, my high school buddy dropped like Ted Kazinsky and is a full time beach bum....er....surfer in Hawaii. Go figure.

"ASA-NC's next public event is a Know Your Rights workshop that will be held on Tuesday, May 19, 6:00pm at the Golden Empire Grange. Some people complain about things, others try to do something proactive."
OK - I give up. What in heck does going to a meeting where most of the folks in attendance vote in the folks that love to confiscate private property have to do with 'doing something proactive' about the govt confiscating private property?
Also - "...and gun owner's rights." I'm always amazed at how the left views human rights as things parcelled out by the govt on a case by case basis. Gay rights, minority rights, gun owner's rights, women's rights.
How about HUMAN rights? We all have the same friggin rights. No more, no less. The same rights - got it? There are no 'special' rights.

Oh Scott, Al Gore was just hunting for votes down in The Dukes of Hazzard Country. Too bad he did not get enough votes to win his home state of Tennessee or else he would have been President Gore to us po folk.

Some say at least VP Gore didn't get drunk and shoot a lawyer in the butt like VP Cheney did, but I say right on Dick, good shot! (No offense to Mr. Barry Pruett, Esq.)

Al would have sat in the Oval Office except he kept speaking his mind and spouting his idea of an inconvient truth. Not exactly the way to win friends and influence people.

Innocent until proven guilty is a myth in the US. Seizing and freezing private property is an accepted practice that is basically a punitive measure before a suspect has been convicted of a crime.

I will also say this as an activist that has been hauled off to holding cells without official being charged with a crime and then released hours later, that is also an abuse of the law. The funny thing is there are so many laws on the books we all could be picked up at anytime and the police would be able to find something to charge us on.

The fact that young men of color are being killed left and right all over the country by police is the ultimate violation of the idea innocent until proven guilty. The police officers are the judge, juror, and executioner.

Social Libertarian/ Anarchist Thoughts

“The state can't give you freedom, and the state can't take it away. You're
born with it, like your eyes, like your ears. Freedom is something you
assume, then you wait for someone to try to take it away. The degree to
which you resist is the degree to which you are free...”
― Utah Phillips

I'm sure Ben was just walking down the street and suddenly a cop hauls him off to jail for no reason whatever. Your nose is growing a bit long, there Ben. Where's the video?
"The fact that young men of color are being killed left and right all over the country by police is the ultimate violation of the idea innocent until proven guilty."
No - it's not. What were these 'young men of color' doing prior to their being shot? And why do albinos always get left out of the mix?
Utah Phillips was big on the freedom of not having to work and taking other's folk's money. His radio show was 'Loafer's Glory'. I think that sums up the lefts lifestyle.

Some times the least expensive way of doing things is the very thing that costs us the most.

Reply

Wow....you're like "The Sphinx".

"To learn my teachings, I must first teach you how to learn."..."He who questions training only trains himself at asking questions.".....When you doubt your powers, you give power to your doubts."....."You must learn to master your anger or anger will become your master?

You might suggest to the jeffy that if keeping the printing of the Union is indeed a profitable venture that he could use some of his IPO proceeds and buy the paper and its equipment. Keep those jobs in Nevada City.

Don B, 5/08 4:45, Your statements are not correct. I looked up the asset forfeitures that were published in the Union and they were comprised on many different takings of cash from individuals. I don't think the "hundreds of thousands of dollars" you referenced were included but that might have been in a different report.

And btw, I am not Polly Parrot, but if you look, you will see that Fish and Polly share the same thumbprint. Curious.

Scott, 5/09, 7:49 Glad you brought up the question, "Where's the video?" The DoJ is making grants available to LE for body cameras. This is a practice the ACLU heartily endorses to keep both the police and the public safer. When there is a video recording of the entire process, many questions are answered before they are asked.

The reason things are so volatile in America is because people like Ben Emery toss bogus data around to stir everyone up. The number of black men killed by police, and for that matter all races, is way down and is nowhere near an ":epidemic". Jeeze, how irresponsible people like Ben Emery are to foist those lies on the people of America. And I thought he was so self righteous!

Asset forfeiture is in my view "unconstitutional" and should be abandoned as such. Hell, a man who wants a little can lose his car if he propositions a gal on the street! I also believe that prostitution should be legal. But if Ben Emery was arrested and tossed into a cell I can see why. My guess is he tossed a loogi at the cops.

"... many questions are answered before they are asked."
Exactly. Such as 'hands up - don't shoot' was just a lie.
It works both ways. Do you really think Ben was just pulled in by the police for nothing?
Then again - do you trust the govt to provide the video of the whole process. They have proven to be masters of 'losing' evidence time and time again. Do you believe the IRS and Shrillery really will be getting us all the emails?
Putting cameras on all cops is not going to end the problem. I don't believe for a second it's going to even do much at all to stop the rioting and racial division the left wants.
And how does it stop the attitude that you should only have what the govt decides you should have?

re BenE's 709am - From my perch Utah Philips was an archetypical homey socialist with a dysfunctional and incoherent ideology that contained a generous sprinkling of bon mots like the one referenced on freedom. The man saw no inconsistency in promoting individual freedoms (of the correct kind) and also promoting the growth of a state that daily proscribed those freedoms.

PaulE 951am - Is that not another answer, based on an anecdotal exception, to a question that clearly asked for the aggregates? That response, replicated throughout these pages, seems to be on the main road of reasoning heavily traveled by the Left.

"The fact that young men of color are being killed left and right all over the country by police is the ultimate violation of the idea innocent until proven guilty." Master Ben

Black lives do matter, and young black thugs deciding to stop killing other blacks, whites and others will go a long way towards peace. That goes for thugs of all colors but blacks are overrepresented among killers of blacks.

The young man of color in Ferguson beat up a cop, tried to take his gun and was shot multiple times as he advanced on the officer, ignoring orders to stop. That's a recipe to be shot by the cop no matter the color of the dear departed because the cop has the same basic human right to defend themselves as everyone else, they generally have at least one gun and are trained how to use it. Even so, many cops get killed before they accurately peg the threat to them by the person or persons they are interacting with.

In Baltimore, half the cops involved were black themselves, it's pretty clear the indictments were hasty and overreaching and so we can probably expect fresh riots when six pounds of flesh is not forthcoming.

Apparently the knife found on Freddie was illegal and after his twenty arrests the cops were very suspicious of him. So right off the bat the facts are he was not shot but somehow his spine was severed while in the police van. Perhaps he was not secured properly and was injured on the ride? Anyway, I feel bad for the cops they had to arrest this Freddie so many times. What is it they say about when someone is finally arrested? They probably committed 100 before that and were not caught. It is sad for Freddie but I do not see intent by the cops.

Patti, the drug dealer murdered in the grow house by another dealer was very well covered in the press. The case was taken over by the Feds. due to the sheer size of the whole operation spanning multiple jurisdictions. There were many hundreds of thousands of dollars involved in that case and Nevada Countys chunk was very sizable last year, something in excess of $300,000.00. Of course there were small seizures in the County but the bulk was that one case of stone drug dealers killing each other.

So Ben backs up his contention of a nation-wide problem with one example.
He was a known problem Ben. And you forgot about the part where he ran from the police. The power structure in Baltimore is black as are some of the cops that have been charged. And there hasn't even been a trial.
That's your proof? Good grief.

Here's a description from the ACLU of Civil Asset Forfeiture, originally part of the RICO act passed by Richard Nixon in 1970:

"Police abuse of civil asset forfeiture laws has shaken our nation’s conscience. Civil forfeiture allows police to seize—and then keep or sell—any property they allege is involved in a crime. Owners need not ever be arrested or convicted of a crime for their cash, cars, or even real estate to be taken away permanently by the government. Forfeiture was originally presented as a way to cripple large-scale criminal enterprises by diverting their resources.

But today, aided by deeply flawed federal and state laws, many police departments use forfeiture to benefit their bottom lines, making seizures motivated by profit rather than crime-fighting. For people whose property has been seized through civil asset forfeiture, legally regaining such property is notoriously difficult and expensive, with costs sometimes exceeding the value of the property. With the total value of property seized increasing every year, calls for reform are growing louder, and the ACLU is at the forefront of organizations seeking to rein in the practice."

PaulE 525pm - I believe you have demonstrated that you are innocent of how to tell the difference between the anecdotal and the aggregate (or synoptic). When the aggregate has been well demonstrated through the abundant evidence of aggregate statistics/data, then throwing in some examples of the same to clarify the case is no longer deemed anecdotal. When providing no evidence for or completely ignoring the aggregate, and arguing the case on the basis of outlier examples, then that is anecdotal. This has been explained to you before with no apparent impact.

Paul @ 5:21pm. "Thank goodness for the ACLU standing up for our rights." Yesirre, the ACLU stands tall defending our rights on 9 out of 10 Amendments. That's a 90% batting average. I just wish the ACLU would stand up just as tall defending the Second Amendment which allows OUR God-given innate 1st Amendment rights possible against an ever growing intrusive government. That's where the rubber meets the road.

Suppose one of you funny pranksters calls the cops and say "That Tozer dude sure has been saying some cray-ass shit lately and he sounds threatening. I am afraid." So, the cops come a'knocking (never alone in these cases) and confiscates my guns. No charges filed, no due process of law, nothing but hearsay, no warrant, yet my property gets a unconstitutionally seized.

Or say I threw one of those lazy-ass ladies out of my place, out of my life, and unto the streets as I have done several times when enough became enough. Not literally "throw" them, just kick 'em out. They could file a restraining order on me tomorrow saying I am stalking their sweet round behinds or threatened to kill their grandmothers and gouge the eyes out of their dogs and cats. Again, no charges filed, no having my day in court, no nothing except I will have my property seized. Happens everyday. Do I turn to the ACLU? "Surely you jest, those aren't real civil liberties" would be what they would say....or just crickets.

Actually it is that you do not see your own blind spots George. You are a huge promoter of top down policies both in private and public sectors that are the antithesis of being libertarian of any stripe.

What Utah Phillips and myself encourage is decentralization of power. When power isn't concentrated in the hands of a relatively small few we all have more say in how our shared lives(society) are run. Our government and big business is not to be blindly trusted with anything.

Bill, do your research. The ACLU has defended gun owner's rights on many occasions. They defend EVERYONE equally which is why fringe folks don't like them (from both sides). And they defend ALL the amendments - not just the second one.

BenE 738am - Your just saying it doesn't make it so. My beliefs are on record here for all to see (in addition to my credo). So it would be an easy matter for you to give examples of my writings that promote "top down policies both in private and public sectors that are the antithesis of (my) being libertarian of any stripe."

I believe that RR readers will not be surprised if you send the cricket corps to substantiate your charge.

But you and Utah Phillips have both been self-declared leftists who have voted for policies and the party of an ever bigger state that seeks to remove every vestige of the Bastiat Triangle from American society.

Actually it's worse than that George. Ben thinks by employing the same tired leftist rhetoric that he can achieve the "magnetic monopole" of politics, the seamless and comprehensive welfare state. You know the one to which I refer....the government that kisses every booboo, wipes every bottom, levels every playing field without simultaneously being the centralized leviathan that Bens claims to hate.

The current progressive in the White House had a chance to devolve power by letting a significant portion of the banking sector collapse and by making sure that whatever followed was never allowed to morph into the "too big to fail, too big to jail" entities that are still with us today! As I'm sure you can guess, Ben was against this because he said it would cause "suffering".....and in this he was correct, it would have been unpleasant....for a while. But after this period hopefully a better run, less politically influential banking sector could have aided in repairing a damaged US economy.

Karl Marx envisioned a decentralized Goverment with the workers bees in the factory calling the shots and determining their own destiny. Local control. That is how it looked on paper. The Matrix is not perfect.

BillT 932am - Ah, but there was the rub Mr Tozer. The worker bees were never to be able to determine their individual destinies; at best only to democratically vote for a collective destiny. And when it came to implementation, today only the leftwing loonies are surprised that there always arose an elite with guns who gave the worker bees only one path forward to either approve or, at their individual peril, disapprove.

Today the same loonies are working hard to revive such a collective, promising that next time there will arise no tyrannical elite with guns, but only proletarian Potemkin puppets happy dancing in the streets. But then, you knew that.

People close to the story stated that the pot robbery was conducted in a para-military fashion that led them to believe that the perps were trained gov't personnel. So who get's the forfeited money when both sides are law enforcement?

Pattie that's a very lame attempt at a distraction from the point we are talking about. There is no connection to that Yuba story whatsoever. Calling BS on your evasion. You previously claimed no such case happened, can't back that up so toss in a red herring. The pot was not stolen in the case in Nevada County so it does not match your effort to misdirect attention.

Don, wrong again! Show me where I denied that someone was shot. I questioned whether this one incident was the sole source of forfeited funds. Two, pot was stolen (just not all of it). Three, it is entirely relevant to the conversation. The Yuba story happened just after the event you described and even before we knew about the Yuba situation, there was already speculation that someone in LE committed the crime based on statements from people in the know. (I'm not saying it was anyone from the NCSO.)

That 'man bites dog' story in the Daily Kos about the ACLU finding limited common ground with the NRA in one vast overreach of police power doesn't erase the ACLU's punting on any hint of the 2nd being an individual, not a collective, right. The standard model of the 2nd, that the first half is statement of reasons, and the second half being a statement of law regarding an individual right became settled law. That was in spite of the ACLU who talk a good game but, after losing so many members over supporting the Nazi's right to march in Skokie, they pretty much abandoned supporting causes that pissed off their Progressive wing.

"Actually it is that you do not see your own blind spots George. You are a huge promoter of top down policies both in private and public sectors that are the antithesis of being libertarian of any stripe.

What Utah Phillips and myself encourage is decentralization of power. When power isn't concentrated in the hands of a relatively small few we all have more say in how our shared lives(society) are run. Our government and big business is not to be blindly trusted with anything." Bre'r Ben 7:38AM

When talking to a friendly political audience, like the "peace vigils" before the resumption of shooting in the Iraq war(s), Utah was a lying sack of sh*t, claiming the majority of the country that was behind the resumption hated the Iraqis, and that we shouldn't hate the Iraqi people.

No one did as far as I can tell. They did want to stop Iraq's government from paying bounty to suicide bombers turning busloads of Israeli schoolchildren into red goo, from taking potshots at allied aircraft lawfully supressing Iraqi government forces killing Iraqi Kurds, from fomenting terrorist activity and (yes) traveling to Niger shopping for yellowcake uranium.

Regarding Ben's professed love of decentralization of power, nothing is more centralized than the forced decarbonization of the economy of California and of the USA.

Patrica @ 12:42pm. Patty, Patty, Patty. Pointing to speculation that the crime commiters were LE is, at the present time, just speculation. Like the time not too long ago you were concerned that "they" would ban somebody from having a glass of wine at a nice restaurant or having a brewskiin a Sports Bar viewing Deflategate. You are a fine articulate passionate civil libertation, but you lose me when you allow rumor, hearsay, and speculation to formulate conclusions. It may fit the narrative, but may be a valid as the made up shocking campus rape story Rolling Stone Magazine published. "The campus gang rape did not happen, but it could have happened or happens all the time" is a crumbling foundation to stand on, in my seldom humble opinion.

Patch Pirates often dress up in paramilitary garb. There are "mercenaries" and other folks trained in takedowns (raids) and folks who are amateurs that copy LE tactics after watching too many episodes of Dog the Bounty Hunter. Heck, I walked into a convience store the other day in GV and they were selling ball caps with 3 big letters across the front: FBI.
In the spirit of overlooking minor and major differences, I saw this article and thought you might find it interesting. Has some big implications if.... I also had no idea that 3/4 of the jurisdictions in CO ban marihuana. It's all in Obama's court now. A very fitting basketball pun if I do say so myself. http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2015/05/10/ready-or-not-the-federal-government-is-about-to-we.aspx?source=eogyholnk0000001

Ben at 7:24 - way out in front of you, Ben. I know all about it. In fact, I knew that ALL lives matter way before this bit of nonsense came along. I have a funny habit of looking at the big picture. White 'progressives' decided to start an ethnic cleansing in this country over 100 years ago. It didn't work well enough so they figured to at least keep most of them rounded up on govt projects and give them just enough to survive on. Then the govt did everything it could to destroy black America's family structure and have lower standards for non whites so it would look like they were helping them. This country will pay the price for decades to come. And America's blacks will be suffering the worst.
I wonder if there is one single leftist in this country that has the intellectual curiosity to consider the fact that blacks in this country do the worst in cities run by leftists?

Sanger could be considered a "racist" in today's lingo since the bulk of abortions are of black babies. What do you say Ben Emery? Is your heroine Sanger a racist? Is Planned Parenthood a practitioner of eugenics? If so does that make you a racist?

Sanger could be considered a "racist" in today's lingo since the bulk of abortions are of black babies. What do you say Ben Emery? Is your heroine Sanger a racist? Is Planned Parenthood a practitioner of eugenics? If so does that make you a racist?

Nahh Todd.....Orwell had this one nailed:

"The power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them... To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just as long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies – all this is indispensably necessary. Even in using the word doublethink it is necessary to exercise doublethink. For by using the word one admits that one is tampering with reality; by a fresh act of doublethink one erases this knowledge; and so on indefinitely, with the lie always one leap ahead of the truth."

Most people read Orwell and consider it a warning....... progressives use it as a "How To" manual.

Well, we may have strayed slightly off topic speaking of the ACLU and a antidotal case in Texas 8 years ago. I found a site last week about The Tea Party teaming up with some Eco Nuts in some place to fight restrictions. One page does not a book make.

Well, they do things differently in Texas. Thanks to the ACLU and its gun right efforts, the good guys won round one in Texas. I know, I know, you can win the battle but lose the war, but we are most grateful for the ACLU's protection of our liberties. Protection against the bad guys such as our Uncle Sam.

Mr Tozer is right, this comment thread on civil rights and blacks being kept on progressive plantations belongs in the 3may15 sandbox. Civil asset forfeiture is an important topic in its own right, and growing more important as LE agencies put anticipated asset seizure monies into their budgets and cynically use RICO laws to deprive Americans of their lives and liberties.

spin spin spin away pattie, Your 9 may 811am- 'Don B your statements are not correct'. They left tons of weed and heaps of cash, sorry that does not fit your twisting of the narrative. Again the point was that there was no million dollars in Nevada County forfeitures last year and that one case resulted in the bulk of Nevada County 2015 forfeitures. You are just trying to obfuscate by tossing another jurisdictions dirty cop into the mix to slam our County LE with innuendo from your 'sources'. How very ferguson hands up don't shoot of you.

Yes, George, the ACLU comments have drifted from civil asset forfeiture to gun rights to abortion. Guess what? The ACLU supports all of these positions! Every civil libertarian should embrace the work of this org. And they have not shied away from representing controversial figures or groups. They supported Oliver North and they are now supporting Edward Snowden. They believe that EVERYONE is entitled to the same basic rights.

Bill, 10May15, 11:12, I was very careful to say that the reports of LE being the perps in the grow house murder was speculation not fact. I realize that patch pirates don paramilitary garb, but you can't deny that there are rogue officers who commit crimes too. I suppose you read about the Deputy Police Chief in Fresno who was arrested for selling heroin, meth and weed (using people he had busted as his fronts)?

I have never said that there were current plans to ban drinking, I was comnenting on a policy that is being floated to have a zero tolerance DUI policy like they have endorsed for marijuana. Please be more accurate if you are going to quote me!

Point taken Patrica. I hope I did not forfeit my most prized possession, which of course is my good standing in your noble eyes. Xxx/ooo. Oh yeah, it was zero adult beverage tolerance in one's bod-ta if one opts to operate a motor vehicle. I am a worm and a naughty person. I am sorry and now I will sulk away to your room to receive my punishment. No caning please.

Prove what? I would suggest the proof is all around. The libs have wrecked the black family and I think it is their racism that drives them. They don't actually want blacks and Latinos here so those white liberals push abortion at any stage of the pregnancy. Even with the baby's head almost poking at at birth!

The only reason the "progressives" have allowed minorities to exist is for their vote Ben Emery. Look at what your "progressive" policies and laws have done to these poor people who simply wanted to come to America for a better life. You have relegated them to barrios and ghettos and as you seem to believe, they are all being murdered by the cops. You are a sick puppy.

What is your point? Are you saying NC doesn't take asset forfeitures? Or that they only came from one bust? Go back and check the thread. I didn't say the County got $1M. I truthfully don't know how much they have gotten in total, but a filing in the Union showed hundreds of thousands of dollars from multiple seizures. (I was shown the paper on March 21 so it would have been in the legal filings sometime that week if you want to look it up.)

But we seem to have gotten off track.The point is that NO forfeitures should take place until a person has been convicted of a crime. Period.

(For the record, I am not bashing Nevada County, I am criticizing the system that allows this practice to exist.)

Let me get this straight; white progressives fighting should to shoulder with people of color in the civil rights movement, fighting for fair banking practices, fighting for income equality, fighting for equal opportunity has caused the majority of the problems for people of color in the US.

It wasn't being slaves, then basic wage slaves deprived of access to capital by banks that kept them from being able to purchase property, Jim Crow laws, systemic racism/ discrimination, excluded from education, ect... Nope it was those damn white progressives fighting for equality.

I think you guys are mixing up being progressive and being liberal again. Progressives want to change/ reform policies so everybody has equal opportunity and access. Where liberals will just add social programs to a bad system.

Even as a progressive I can agree that certain govt. programs to help the inner city poor (and rural poor for that matter) had incentives in place that needed to be modified, but were left alone for way too many years. That was not progressive as Ben states, rather the opposite. Unfortunately Dem politicians were not progressive or dynamic enough in monitoring impacts and outcomes in the cities, but were constantly having to fend off right wingers with their own brand of simplistic solutions- to simply cut off most funding and let folks pull themselves up by their bootstraps. The point is- there is no way for most of those folks now to get out of their situation without assistance. All of us are Americans and we are in this together to solve problems. So great, lets talk about changing programs and THINKING about solutions for once, instead of ignoring these poor Americans and taking the easy way out in simply cutting off funding and saying "good luck" to millions of folks who are stuck.

Jon 1146am - We have been talking about solutions here for the last eight years. They have been based on what once worked for blacks (before the launch of Great Society programs) and today continues to work for non-blacks. It involves a total change of culture that honors familial responsibility, education, self-initiative, and abandonment of victimhood as many black thinkers and writers have taught and continue to tell their brethren. But a reliable litmus test of a progressive is to brand all these as dysfunctional "simplistic solutions", and demand even more money be spent to do things right the next time. Not enough money has never been the cause of any of these societal problems as we can instantly see by tallying up the trillions spent with no improvement in the aggregate stats that count. But I agree that the conversation must continue because the current state of affairs does not bode well for our Republic.

Ben - you are flagged for total BS.
"... fighting for equal opportunity...."
Progressives want equal outcomes, not opportunities.
Please name one 'progressive' that is fighting for school vouchers. Poor blacks being able to attend private schools of their choice would help them right now.
I notice you won't (or can't) respond to my points about what the 'progressives' have actually done. Instead, you come back with vague words such as 'fight for'. Equal opportunity under the law and Constitutional rights are strangely missing from the 'progressive' lexicon.
Here's the latest govt theft of funds from a private citizen:http://dailysignal.com/2015/05/11/the-irs-seized-107000-from-this-north-carolina-mans-bank-account-now-hes-fighting-to-get-it-back/
But he's a fat old white man, so the 'progressives' like Ben just look the other way. Remember Ben - justice for ALL or justice for none.

George, I would not argue that necessarily more money is needed to battle the problems of inner city America. But rather than talking about slash and burn funding cuts as Job One, as we see in many states with politically ambitious Governors, we certainly need to talk more about the most efficient use of that money to battle these terrible problems. Institutional discrimination and racism are part of the mix, whether some like it or not, and it needs to be addressed. I agree 100% with your last sentence.

I think you guys are mixing up being progressive and being liberal again. Progressives want to change/ reform policies so everybody has equal opportunity and access. Where liberals will just add social programs to a bad system.

Much like "Privilege" has taken over for "Racist" because people just weren't paying attention any more...."Progressive" is just the new marketing term that those of your political stripe adopted after the term "Liberal" started smelling so foul!

I hear you guys say....Jesse Jackson like...."Don't end them....mend them" but the programs/policies just get more expensive and more corrupt with each budget cycle. Any hint at accountability leads to the wailing and gnashing of teeth about "Balancing the budget on the backs of the poor" and "Conservatives HATE poor people"!

Watching the Jeffersonians speak in front of the BOS right now.
First, the 3 minute financial summary of the new State, which was simply a quick summary of current Nevada County revenues and uses...giant fail. Followed by this emotional, flustered guy from Santa Barbara with the stack of papers who forgot his charts, a self proclaimed Constitutional "expert" confusing trillions and billions...droning on and on with obvious talking points...the deputy from Sikiyou County..you get the picture.

The Deputy is a well spoken guy, very passionate about representation, BUT we are 45 minutes in to the Jefferson speeches and still not a mention of a single, solid financial reason to move the County to a new state.

On the subject of the above comments about "equality",, that also comes with "equal" responsibility. " Equal" standards. ( no matter what your color or background)

The bar for "this job" is "X",, Some want "special treatment" because of color so they don't need to be at that "equal" level. Sorry,, it doesn't work that way. ( That would be affirmative action folks,,.)
Hell.. I have been hearing how Blacks should be allowed to show up late, speak improper English (Ebonics), should be allowed to poorly on tests, ( just because of their skin color) because,, "that's just the way they are, and how their "culture" is.
I say ,, BULL SHIT!! And this crap is coming from their own "leaders". ( I.E. LIBERALS,, good ol' Southern Democrats.) Gotta keep'm on the Lefty plantation. How dare them break away from,, and not need the Democrat "massa's"!! They jus don't know what's good for them!
Why does the LIBS want to keep them under educated? Why do the LIBS want to keep pushing color as a crutch?

Walt, now see- first you linked to a legitimate article and issue, and then you go and ruin it with some ridiculous rant about hearsay on the right wing blogs, obviously people trying to stir the pot. Stuff you mentioned doesn't pass the smell test. WHO is saying those things about different standards? Names or organizations please..

"Hearsay blogs"? Uh,,, No... This was a big issue on the radio just yesterday. ( and no,, not Rush) This attitude is nothing new. It's right up there with this new "White privilege" crap. Save you and me some time. Google it bub,,.... I'm SURE you can find something. ( I did)

"some ridiculous rant about hearsay on the right wing blogs"
Wrong-O, Jon. Any test that flunks too many non-white and non-male candidates is automatically considered racist/sexist and is thrown out. http://nypost.com/2015/05/03/woman-to-become-ny-firefighter-despite-failing-crucial-fitness-test/
And the big one:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ricci_v._DeStefano
The truth sucks when you don't know reality.
And there's lots more. If you really cared to check it out. not.
I love Jon's empathy - "No one would support what happened to that man."
Actually, Jon, you and millions do by not standing up to these thugs and supporting candidates that would end this if elected.
Progressives won't - Lefties and libs won't - RINOs won't.